13
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 4:
Line 4: + + + + + +
no edit summary
If you are relying on some source which '''asserts''' that the film said this - but they didn't quote the film - then you have to say that reviewer A reported that the film said B. Do you understand? --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] <sup>[[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]]</sup> 16:18, 24 April 2008 (EDT)
If you are relying on some source which '''asserts''' that the film said this - but they didn't quote the film - then you have to say that reviewer A reported that the film said B. Do you understand? --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] <sup>[[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]]</sup> 16:18, 24 April 2008 (EDT)
I guess I was trying to express the spirit of the original criticism article, before Aschlafly edited it for "liberal bias." Frankly, his changes added a lot more commentary, and seemed more biased than the original.
Here is the original version of the criticism, which does say the film has been accused of quote mining (a term for taking parts of quotes out of context). http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Expelled:_No_Intelligence_Allowed&oldid=436511
You can judge for yourself and get back to me. Thanks. --[[User:SeanF|SeanF]] 01:21, 4 May 2008 (EDT)